Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Japan/Archive/May 2012

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Japan (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject icon This page is within the scope of the WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 10:42, April 17, 2014 (JST, Heisei 26) (Refresh)
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 
Discussion archives for WikiProject Japan
2006 - 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 2007 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 2008 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 2009 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
2010 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 2011 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 2012 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 2013 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
2014 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 2015 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 2016 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 2017 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Task force talk archives
Active and joint task force talk pages
Descendant and related project talk pages

RFC on Murasaki Shikibu

I think the current lead image is a very bad choice. It would be grateful if you could post your comment at Talk:Murasaki Shikibu#Wrong picture. Thank you. Oda Mari (talk) 09:33, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Kana as a pronunciation guide

Is there any reason to give the Japanese pronunciation of a subject's name in kana in the opening, as is done for Yui and Misia? Both of these singers are normally given in Japanese sources using all-caps Romanji, i.e. YUI and MISIA. If there is some reason to use kana, I have to wonder why the names of Yasuhiro Nakasone, Itō Hirobumi, Yukio Mishima, Norio Ohga, and Shintaro Ishihara, among many others, are not given using this script. All these bios open with a Romanized name followed by a kanji name in parenthesis. Pronunciation is given using Hepburn, not kana. That is to say, the standard is English-language name followed by the native-language form. Anyone familiar with this convention, which quite widely followed on Wiki, will assume that the singers have kana names in Japanese, which is not the case. Kauffner (talk) 04:56, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

If the kanji is not known, then using kana is perfectly acceptable as it gives the Japanese pronunciation, something not necessarily clear from the rōmaji (there is no "n" in the word). This is the case in both of the initial examples you give. In English, "Misia" could be pronounced a few different ways, so knowing the Japanese pronunciation via the kana is important. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 05:56, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
There is nothing about using kana for pronunciation in WP:MOS-JP. In fact, it refers you to WP:IPA for Japanese. Kauffner (talk) 06:20, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
That wasn't there originally, so we'll have to go back and look to see when it was added. It was not discussed as far as I know. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 06:55, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
Neither YUI's nor MISIA's stage names exist in a form native to Japanese so it is not evident as to how these names should be pronounced in Japanese, and neither of those names are the romaji forms. "YUI" could be "Wye U I" or something might be pronounced with a long vowel. And the pronunciation of "MISIA" is not clearly evident from looking at it. Kauffner, it appears that your only argument against this is that you assume that it implies that the katakana form is the accepted form. I've proposed on both Talk:Misia and Talk:Yui (singer) that includes the all-caps form in the {{nihongo}} template with the katakana form of that name directly following it in parentheses, but this does not make it evident that "Yui" and "Misia" are the forms we have chosen on the English Wikipedia to conform with WP:MOSCAPS and WP:MOSTM because neither YUI nor MISIA are suitable article titles (another matter you have disagreed upon in the past).—Ryulong (竜龙) 08:22, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
If a pronunciation guide is needed for names like "Misia", then surely it should be given using IPA, which is universally understood. Using katakana as a pronunciation guide on English Wikipedia strikes me as bizarre, and, as I have mentioned on the relevant article talk pages, misleadingly implies that the katakana forms are how the names are written in Japanese situations, which is not the case for either Yui or Misia. --DAJF (talk) 09:59, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
The issue is that IPA is not used in the academic world when it comes to the Japanese language. Instead, the Hepburn romanization is used in academia. But the fact of the matter is that we have always included the Japanese written language form of the name if the subject of the article is known by a name in Japan that consists of the English alphabet, instead of the Japanese kanji or kana systems. In all of the history of these articles, only you two (DAJF and Kauffner) have argued that including the katakana form on Yui (singer) and Misia is misleading. No one else has ever thought we might be implying something inaccurate to our readers.—Ryulong (竜龙) 19:15, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
I notice an unfortunately tendency to personalize issues here. Certainly other editors have complained about the kana issue in the past, although I don't see how that is relevant. "We have always included" Japanese script even if the name in Japanese is not given using such script? So what's going on with AKB48 and DJ Ozma? I don't see any kana! Kauffner (talk) 06:29, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
As far as I can tell, you and DAJF have been the only editors to make this an issue. "AKB48" is an initialism, and perhaps I'll go ahead and add the katakana to DJ Ozma's page.—Ryulong (竜龙) 22:12, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

I've already said my piece at Talk:Yui (singer), but since the discussion has migrated here, I'll copy and paste it here for consideration:

The katakana ユイ does not belong in the article.
It can't be justified as a Japanese name, because it's not used as a name. "YUI" is the name in use; "ユイ" is not.
Justifying using a Japanese character set to purportedly provide pronunciation in an English encyclopedia, designed for an English-speaking audience, makes no sense. IPA should be used instead if there is any issue of pronunciation. See WP:PRON.
I see nothing in WP:MOS-JA that indicates non-transliteration use of katakana should be included in the article simply because the individual is Japanese.
I don't see any indication of any consensus that the katakana should be in the article. I see that it's been sitting in there for a long time, but inertia is not consensus. Consensus is a general agreement among editors; see WP:CONSENSUS. Consensus emerges out of discussions like this one. Furthermore, even if there once had been a consensus to include the katakana (which has not been demonstrated) consensus can change. TJRC (talk) 21:46, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

TJRC (talk) 23:08, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

However, if the person is written in Katakana in Japanese documents, as sometimes occurs, instead of using Latin lettering, then it is appropriate to have katakana in our article, since it would be a variant spelling used in the original language. 70.49.124.225 (talk) 04:59, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
Certainly. But is that the case with Yui (singer) or Misia? Have you ever seen AKB48 written as "エーケービー フォーティエイト" in Japanese sources? --DAJF (talk) 07:25, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
For AKB48, GNews has six katakana examples out of 31,000 mentions. But that doesn't seem to phase Ryulong.[1] Kauffner (talk) 08:05, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
Google News shouldn't be the metric when it exists in other forms. A Google search of the katakana provides 37 thousand results so it is not non-existant by any means. And frankly Kauffner, you raised the point and I acted upon it. After all, it is not clear if it's "A.K.B. Four-Eight" or "A.K.B. Yonjū Hachi" or "A.K.B. Yon Hachi". By including some other alternate form of reading, we can inform our readers of how the name is properly pronounced in Japanese and by extension English speakers.—Ryulong (竜龙) 08:28, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Ryulong, the Clubdam karaoke site you quote above is intended for Japanese speakers, so has minimal relevance here. It provides the katakana reading for English bands in exactly the same way (e.g. Queen). I'm still not at all convinced why using kana is in anyway helpful to the vast majority of people reading these articles. If there is any confusion over pronunciation, we should be using IPA or English-language notes, such as "pronounced AKB forty-eight". --DAJF (talk) 08:45, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
  • This edit you made renders the article unreadable. And the kana after the band's name is misleading, it is making you believe "エーケービー フォーティエイト" is the group's official name in Japanese. Moscowconnection (talk) 09:12, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
  • What if we added a katakana レイディ ガガ to Lady GaGa article? Why is it permitted to add kanas to Yui (singer), Misia or AKB48? WP:UEIA doesn't apply to this case. Also, Why L'Arc-en-Ciel, Luna Sea ... in Category:Japanese rock music groups do not include kana in the lede.?―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 09:22, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
  • When did Lady Gaga become Japanese? If a topic (ie. Yui (singer) ) is a native Japanese topic, and some native Japanese sources use Kana, then WP:UEIA applies. 70.49.124.225 (talk) 11:46, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
  • This is exactly the problem. The kana in the opening is misleading readers into thinking that her name is written this way in Japanese. In Japanese sources, Yui is given as YUI.[2] I don't think anyone has seriously claimed otherwise. Kauffner (talk) 13:38, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
  • I searched Google News, and found no sources that would have written YUI's name in Katakana. "ユイ" is being used as Uee's Japanese name. Moscowconnection (talk) 14:21, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Someone could write a special section about the way Lady Gaga's name is pronounced in different languages. The same goes for AKB48. I think the info on the Japanese pronunciation of "AKB48" is useful and it can be added somewhere in the article. But it's unnecessary in the lead section, since the official name is already in English. Moscowconnection (talk) 10:05, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
I see 0 examples. :) There are a few pronunciation guides for AKB48 and AKB0040 (in brackets). I can't see "エーケービー フォーティエイト" having been used even once as the group's name. Moscowconnection (talk) 13:29, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
Most people don't have East Asian language support installed and see squares. It looks unprofessional. An article should start with a simple English-language sentence (official original-language name in brackets), not with some monstruosity like "pronounced as エーケービー フォーティエイト Ēkēbī Fōtieito". :) Moscowconnection (talk) 12:45, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
The subject is Japanese in origin. That would mean that some sort of Japanese text is expected on the page about them. And I see that accepting Kauffner's advice to make it so no subject is devoid of the matter it's a WP:POINT vio. Perhaps it is not necessary on pages where it is blatantly obvious how the name is pronounced in English, but for Misia which is pronounced the same as "Mischa" and not "Mísia" it is necessary. I cannot see how there is this apparently wide spread belief that our readers apparently all think that the katakana name, if provided, must be the way the name is parsed in Japan. The Club DAM website is meant for Japanese readers, yes, but it shows that the katakana form is in use, if minimal. I do not understand why we are referencing the fact that Queen is "クイーン" in Japan, because that is how they will write the name of that band in Japan and it is relevant within Japan. We are not discussing Anglophone subjects' Japanese names. We are discussing Japanese subject's Japanese names which just happen to utilize the English alphabet. Either way, the IP brings up a proper point that these are Japanese language subjects which sometimes have the names parsed in katakana and that alternate form should be included in some form per WP:UEIA. And I've provided sources that show that the katakana forms are in usage, even if they are just part of a karaoke song directory or in the name of related products.—Ryulong (竜龙) 19:20, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
We can just write "Misia (pron. Misha)". If you want to add a more thorough pronunciation guide, it can be done lower. Since it would require writing something like "Japanese pronuncuation: ...", I don't think we should pile it all up in the first paragraph. I understand that you wanted to make it short, but I agree with the people who say that adding the info like that is misleading. I'm not against using katakana in the text, but it must be stated clearly that it represents the Japanese pronunciation of a name. Moscowconnection (talk) 20:30, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
See C-ute. I'm not sure I did it well, but this is how I dealt with info on pronunciation myself. I added it below. Moscowconnection (talk) 20:30, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
The fact is that it should be placed in the first paragraph because there's no where else in the article it could go. But I could see that "pronounced Mīsha (ミーシャ?)" might be sufficient instead. But even then, this raises a problem for Yui, which has identical Hepburn to the name itself. And C-ute's lead needs work anyway.—Ryulong (竜龙) 21:37, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
I shouldn't have shown the C-ute article to you. You added katakana there too! I undid your edits, sorry. Moscowconnection (talk) 23:09, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
I don't think it raises a problem for Yui. Since her name is already written the way it's pronounced, it doesn't need a pronunciation guide. Moscowconnection (talk) 23:09, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
Cute (Japanese band) (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs|views) had way too much coverage just on the name. I have not suggested that it is written as キュート. I have stated it is read as Cute/キュート/Kyūto. There is nothing wrong with the katakana. It is a Japanese subject and there should be some sort of explanation of how the name is supposed to be read. Just saying it's "Cute" or "Kyūto" in a completely separate line from the lead makes no sense. You are just showing how shoddily written these pages are when they don't conform to common sense and the manuals of style.—Ryulong (竜龙) 23:12, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
And as an aside, the AKB48 articles are in a horrible state anyway. It seems that the people primarily involved with the upkeep of those pages do not understand how {{nihongo}} is supposed to be used. Out of all of the articles on singles I've found, none of them provide the Hepburn romanization form of a word if it's an English loanword.—Ryulong (竜龙) 19:23, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
I know you can't ruin something that is already in bad state. But I was shocked by what you did to AKB48. :) The article's lead is readable, and I don't really think it should be rewritten in katakana. :) I didn't know that providing the Hepburn romanization for English loanwords was a must. If it is, I'll be adding it from now on. Moscowconnection (talk) 20:30, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
Well, take a look at what I did to Skirt, Hirari or Chance no Junban to see what I meant.—Ryulong (竜龙) 21:37, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Section break

Ryulong is starting another edit war here. He's adding katakana again. I'm removing the kana and asking him to stop until there's a consensus. Moscowconnection (talk) 00:08, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Jesus fucking christ, there was a way for how the god damn name was supposed to be written on that article until you removed it from the page a month and a half ago. I have simply added in the proper information that was absent to begin with, and taken several sentences and compressed the relevant information into a single one. The inflection part was on the article several years ago, and I found it on the Japanese article as well. Now we are not providing our readers with necessary information to understand the subject because of you. None of this was ever an issue before until Kauffner sought to edit war on Misia (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs|views) over the course of several months.—Ryulong (竜龙) 00:11, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Yes, the inflection is indeed on the Japanese article, but it's unsourced. There are no sources for the band's name being supposed to be pronounced differently from the way Japanese pronounce the English word "cute". Moscowconnection (talk) 01:05, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
I've been rewriting the article since last spring, so removing the kana was just one little improvement. I made it before this discussion started. Moscowconnection (talk) 01:05, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Also, regarding Cute (Japanese band) (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs|views), the katakana is blatantly part of their logo.—Ryulong (竜龙) 00:24, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
It's probably for children, so they could read it. Moscowconnection (talk) 01:05, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
I doubt that. And even if it were, it shows that it's in common usage and therefore should be on the page.—Ryulong (竜龙) 01:09, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
I like the way you wrote "Cute (Japanese band)", cause, since the degree Celsius symbol was removed from the title, the band's name should be written the way it's pronounced, "Cute". But that's a completely different topic. Moscowconnection (talk) 01:23, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
You did it! You moved it! Great! I've been thinking about it, and I created the redirect from Cute (Japanese band) but I didn't do it cause I thought I would need to discuss it first. It eliminates the need for explaining about the word "Cute" in the lead. Moscowconnection (talk) 01:31, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
That's the third time you added katakana there. Is it edit war? To add the katakana, you would have to show "キュート" being used in the mass media. While you were making the unsourced edits, I searched Google News. I have only found it being used in brackets after the band's name. "キュート" is used as the English word "cute" in the press. Moscowconnection (talk) 01:42, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
It's in the band's logo. I don't think I need any more of a reliable source than that. And you yourself have just stated that the band's name is written as "℃-ute(キュート)" in the press, which is exactly the way I have it in the article now.—Ryulong (竜龙) 01:50, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
I interpret that as a name followed by a pronunciation guide. Out of 11,000 GNews hits for "℃-ute", only 13 give katakana. So many editors have objected, but you keep adding kana to more articles. This getting pretty pointy. We need to consider ANI. Kauffner (talk) 05:04, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
I stated that I had found some occasions when "キュート" was added after the band's name somewhere in an article, not that it was written like that continuously. Actually, it's added in the beggining and only once. If it wasn't a pronunciation guide, it would be added repeatedly. Moscowconnection (talk) 05:52, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Kauffner, if the katakana name is blatantly included in the logo of the band and it is included in any Google News hits, it's a valid alternate form per WP:UEIA. Right now the lede of Cute (Japanese band) reads "{{nihongo|Cute|℃-ute(キュート)|Kyūto|[can't remember off hand]}}" so it is giving the katakana form just as several Japanese language sources do. I don't know what your obsession with Google News is, but a flat out Google search provides 568,000 results for "℃-ute(キュート)". It is getting asinine that something as blatant as inclusion in the band's logo is being disputed when it's on their website, on all of their album art, and in anything else directly associated with the band itself. "℃-ute" is inherently associated with "キュート" according to the band and their record label, so why should we not keep that association on the English Wikipedia when referring to this group's Japanese name? I find it hard to believe that they are going to have a pronunciation guide for their name on each of their 18 singles and 7 albums. And even then, if it is clearly not easily identifiable as to how to pronounce their name in Japanese that they must include it on all of their press and album covers then it should probably be important for us to include it as well and not omit it just because it can be approximated as being pronounced similarly to how someone would say the English word "cute" parsed through the katakana system.—Ryulong (竜龙) 06:50, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
And as an aside, I believe there is not going to be much of a consensus gained from this if it is just going to be a small handful of us arguing our points back and forth. I can see that there are other people editing this page by voting in the image usage poll above and no one is bothering to enter this quagmire that should not have gone beyond the handful of article talk pages these issues should have been raised on in the first place.—Ryulong (竜龙) 07:05, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
You rang? Before you posted the last couple of messages, I did notice that there was some argument here over whether or not to (re)add katakana to, or delete it from, the lead of an article about some pop group. I'd never heard of the pop group but am unsurprised to hear that a Japanese pop group calls itself "Cute", with a 可愛い romanized spelling to boot. But as soon as I started to read it, I got lost. I read: both syllables are inflected. What on earth does that mean? (Does キュート somehow manage to exhibit ablaut?) As I read the rest of the article, I get more and more depressed: Why is it that infantilism is endemic in Japan? I hang on to the notion of inflectable Japanese syllables as, however wrongheaded, a lonely island of non-infantilism within the article. ¶ As for the katakana, how is it not inferrable from the Hepburn form, which is anyway given? But I can't see anything wrong with providing it. After all, it's just four characters, less wastage than in for example "had to be contented with" to mean "won" (about twenty surplus characters) -- Hoary (talk) 08:16, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
This wasn't meant as a separate topic. It's Ryulong who created it. I posted my message in the previous discussion. AKB48 has 8 syllables, which is more serious. And "they had to be contented" cause a nomination means that you have already won a Gold Award at least; so you can't really win it at the ceremony. Moscowconnection (talk) 08:46, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
From what I'm reading the Kyū and To bits are accented or something, so it's not pronounced /kjuːt/ or /ˈkjuːto/ but /ˈkjuːˈto/. And the issue is not just regarding the band Cute but all Japanese article subjects who have names that are primarily parsed with the English alphabet in Japan, such as the pop singer Misia or the telecom company SoftBank. This whole bit down here simply regards actions taken on Cute (Japanese band) rather than the greater debate as to whether or not katakana is helpful on the aforementioned articles or if they falsely imply that the subject is primarily known by the katakana name in Japan, which was the original argument against inclusion.—Ryulong (竜龙) 08:51, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Allow me to add myself to the voices against adding kana to these kinds of articles. I don't really see a need for it. For the pronunciation, we have Hepburn romanization (I wouldn't mind IPA as well, but I'm not sure if it's necessary). To show how it is normally written in Japan, we can just use the original kanji, romaji, or yes, kana. I don't see what need would be fulfilled by adding kana to every article, though. In the case of Cute, the kana in the band's logo looks very much like a pronunciation guide to me. I think a lot of Japanese elementary school kids would be confused if they just saw "℃-ute" with no kana. On a related note, I was surprised to see that there was no link to a pronunciation guide on any of these pages. Maybe we could consider linking to Help:Japanese#Japanese pronunciation or something similar? — Mr. Stradivarius 08:37, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
In the case of "Cute", if the katakana is frequently used in Japanese sources, I don't see why you don't have it in the article. Clearly it would then be used in Japanese, and therefore a good thing to have for search if nothing else. 70.49.124.225 (talk) 03:59, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
  • We are not adding it to every article. We are adding it to articles that concern subjects for which their names are normally parsed with English letters in the Japanese markets and whether or not the katakana is helpful or if it falsely implies that the subject's name is written in that way in Japan. This heading concerning ℃-ute was simply a section break that needed to occur. And, again, I do not think that the katakana that accompanies "℃-ute" in its logotype in every single instance is just there because children are the fans of the band. I am not sure where this assumption that the group is marketed towards children has come from, but it does not seem to be a good enough reason to omit relevant information from a page. And while you suggest that the Hepburn romanization be used, how would we include the Hepburn romanization if there is no Japanese text that requires romanization? It is the argument of these editors that katakana, such as that found on Misia, AAA (band), B'z (Yes, my examples are all musical groups but they're the only ones I can find with ease), etc., should not be included at all, even when the pronunciation in either language is not evident.—Ryulong (竜龙) 08:51, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
    Both "before" and "after" are unsourced. And now there are 3 pronunciation guides, do we need them all? Moscowconnection (talk) 09:08, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
    /ˈkjuːˈto/: well then, equal stress on both syllables, but nothing to do with inflection (at least as I understand the word inflection). ¶ If a Japanese pop group consists of teens or preteens, I'm sure that its fans include adults. ¶ Hepburn romanization, which I happen to despise but which WP uses, is actually pretty good for transliteration purposes. (True, オニヅカ becomes Onizuka and thus indistinguishable from オニズカ; but this kind of thing is unusual.) Should all names be given in katakana merely because Hepburn isn't helpful for a tiny minority of them? ¶ Of course you could dump Hepburn, but if you use neither Hepburn nor kana it's not so easy to see how a name fits into Japanese phonology. (And somebody is sure to claim irritation by the use of IPA.) ¶ No, you don't need three pronunciation guides. But what harm does any of them do? (I'd rather cut waffly phrasing and junk such as the "infobox".) -- Hoary (talk) 09:11, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
    What harm do any of them do? The opening is the most important part of the article. It should be be a clear, concise English-language sentence. It should not be full of linguistic hot dogging that few readers will understand. Three pronunciation guides? Somebody in Japan needs to record some audio files. Then we can get rid of these pronunciation guides altogether. Kauffner (talk) 06:22, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
    Well, the Hepburn system is in itself not a pronunciation guide. It is a means of transliterating the Japanese texts into a form that is easily understandable by an audience that uses the Roman alphabet. By including "キュート" (which is blatantly used in the group's logotype in every instance) or "ミーシャ", we are effectively showing how the Japanese transliterate "℃-ute" and "MISIA" into their text system, which to me is something useful to show. I believe we simply need to come up with some way to state this fact clearly, so we are not, as it was your original argument against inclusion as far as I am aware, falsely implying that the katakana form is the primary form, while also showing how to pronounce the name without utilizing the hard to understand International Phonetic Alphabet and instead using a form native to academia.—Ryulong (竜龙) 07:03, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
    While I am not a fan of the band, I would assume the way that the band's name is spoken would explain why there's a footnote on ja:℃-ute explaining that a specific intonation (I'm sorry, that's the phrasing that they're using, not the others) exists. And from the edits that have been occuring, particularly to Misia, it would seem that no pronunciation form should be included according to the original proposer of this discussion. Either that or the Hepburn form should be kept, but it should be included in some unnecessarily wordy sentence. In the end, it does not make sense to me that when discussing names written with the English alphabet, but are perhaps not inherently easy to discern the pronunciation, that either both Hepburn and kana are omitted, or kana is omitted but Hepburn is kept. This frankly reminds me of the development of WP:VG/JP to satisfy those who wanted to keep katakana, but exclude Hepburn for words lent from English to Japanese.—Ryulong (竜龙) 09:37, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
    The Japanese Wikipedia says: "ja:イントネーションは頭高型(\_)ではなく、2つの音節とも高く全体が平板なアクセント( ̄ ̄)である。". It's an unsourced footnote. If i'm not mistaken, the second part says that both syllables pronounced monotoniously in high tone. The first part is probably supposed to mean that the word isn't pronounced like the English word, but it links to Intonation instead of Stress, so it's probably not scientific and is written by a fan. Moscowconnection (talk) 09:55, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
    The Japanese Wikipedia does not have the same "Everything needs to be strictly cited" mantra that we have, but I don't think that means we should not trust their accuracy. Either way, if we examine what they call themselves, we can see whether or not it's one or the other. I've removed the content from the article because it's just distracting us from the discussion of whether or not the katakana is beneficial to the reader if the subject is a Japanese individual or group who have an Anglo-esque name in Japan.—Ryulong (竜龙) 10:49, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
    About AKB48, katakana, and accuracy. There had been a different pronunciiation guide before last autumn. It was changed from "エーケービー フォーティーエイト" to "エーケービー フォーティエイト" on September 1, 2011. Moscowconnection (talk) 11:21, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
    That's a difference between Fōtī and Fōti. It seems that currently the preferred form is Fōti.—Ryulong (竜龙) 19:16, 6 May 2012 (UTC)


  • The first part of the Japanese Wikipedia footnote says simply "Intonation is not downward". I've searched for examples of usage of "頭高型", and it's used for describing a first-syllable accent and a falling intonation. Moscowconnection (talk) 18:12, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

As far as I'm concerned katakana is by no means a pronunciation guide for Wikipedia's audience, i.e. readers of English. If it's not how the name is usually written, it's misleading junk. In cases where the name in Roman script doesn't make the pronunciation clear, write an explanatory note or use IPA, e.g. "pronounced A-K-B forty-eight" or "pronounced [miːɕa]". If the reader really wants katakana, they can go to the Japanese Wikipedia. JIMp talk·cont 15:55, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

  • In my opinion, Ryulong has summed up the current situation surprisingly well: " And frankly I am digging myself a hole." Kauffner (talk) 16:29, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
    That was in regards to the fact that it was a growing argument between two people without any outside input. And Jimp, IPA is not the preferred form when we have the Library of Conress preferred Hepburn romanization. Why would we exclude it on these pages just because the subject's name is written in the English alphabet? And still, the katakana form exists in usage, even if it is not used to directly refer to subjects such as AKB48 or B'z.—Ryulong (竜龙) 19:14, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Ryulong's right that Hepburn (barf) romanization is preferred to IPA, and there are good reasons for it. For instance, one cannot get IPA fonts for Android phones (a constant frustration to those of us who would love to use our phones as dictionaries). Also, most English speakers---even language students---are not familiar with IPA. Personally, I'd rather see a romanization that was ugly macron-free, and that could be transliterated cleanly back into hiragana (i.e. for ぬまづ). Katakana doen't cut it, because we can't assume people reading the articles can actually read katakana. That includes (embarrassingly) huge swaths of the English-speaking population who actually reside in Japan. CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 21:28, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
My own objection to Hepburn has nothing to do with macrons; as for IPA, thank you for giving me yet another reason not to "upgrade" from my dumbphone. (I don't think the dumbphone even manages áàâä, much less ā; but as long as it's capable of tiny emails and has minuscule monthly charges, it's fine for me.) ¶ Back to the question. I don't fully see either (a) why katakana is helpful here, or (b) [assuming for a moment that it isn't helpful] the reason for animosity to it. A waste of bytes, perhaps? A tiny number of bytes, while this particular article still includes such blather as "had to be contented with" for "won" and "pursue her dream of becoming" for "become"; contains PR guff such as "The live stream was a big success"; talks mysteriously about "graduating"; is sprinkled with the apparently pleonastic modifier "official"; and is only sporadically sourced. Me, I confess that I'd be untroubled if Japanese pop music disappeared from the planet tomorrow, but I presume that somebody here thinks that it merits encyclopedic coverage. So why this obsession with a single, minuscule percentage of the article? -- Hoary (talk) 00:28, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
My own objection to both katakana and IPA would apply to non-J-Pop articles, as well. It's both pointless and potentially misleading (the second point being the more important). Your objections to the crappiness of the articles have nothing to do with the subject of the articles themselves, but with article crappiness in general. The two are separate issues, however. Are you arguing that the katakana should be kept until the articles are uncrappified, and only then should we talk about keeping or removing the katakana?
To get away from J-Pop specifically, Tokyo seems to be a well-written, well-sourced article. Should we include a katakana pronunciation guide there, too? CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 01:12, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
This is getting off track. No one is suggesting that katakana be used on all articles on Japanese language subjects. Nor is the focus of this discussion Cute (Japanese band). It is just something that came up. Again, no one is suggesting that katakana forms be added to pages like Tokyo, Tokugawa Ieyasu, Junichiro Koizumi, etc. This is whether or not katakana (or the {{nihongo}} template itself) be included on pages where the subject is known in Japan by a name written entirely in the Roman alphabet, because according to some of those who disagree with the inclusion assume it may imply to our readers that the katakana form is predominant. This does mostly affect pop culture pages such as Cute (Japanese band), but we are not just discussing this article.—Ryulong (竜龙) 02:19, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
Well, I for one agree that it is misleading---that it suggests that the katakana form is an officially accepted alternative form of the name (which in the vast majority of cases, it is not), rather than merely a pronunciation guide (which in the vast majority of cases it is). I hope this removes any ambiguity from my own position.
Your usage of the {{la}} template is unhelpfully distracting, by the way. CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 02:32, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
It's meant to direct the article than the subject, but I will get rid of it.
And is it really misleading, particularly when its used in an organizational sense on various websites? And it is possible that it is an alternate form which doubles as a pronunciation guide in some cases. Either way, it leaves us with a problem when the subject is Japanese but there is no Japanese script form of the subject's name, making it impossible to properly show the pronunciation (as IPA is still not the preferred form in academia).—Ryulong (竜龙) 02:39, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
If it's truly used as such, that should be noted. You'll find, however, that in almost all situations a pronunciation guide is honestly no more than a pronunciation guide. CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 07:11, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
Well, how come the kana forms are extensively used to organize things in Japanese? And is it so awful to include katakana for non-Japanese script names?—Ryulong (竜龙) 06:56, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
Maybe because Japanese script is, like, easier and more familiar to Japanese people than IPA? It's like when you see: "Brontosaurus (say: brawn-tuh-SORE-iss)". Nobody would seriously suggest that "brawn-tuh-SORE-iss" was an acceptable way to write "brontosaurus". It's used because hardly anybody is familiar with IPA. CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 07:11, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Section break 2

[Bouncing leftward] Above: My own objection to both katakana and IPA would apply to non-J-Pop articles, as well. It's both pointless and potentially misleading (the second point being the more important). This puzzles me. Yes please, let's take Tokyo as our example. (Merely reading about a Japanese pop group called "Cute" is saccharine overload for me.) The bare suggestion that "Tokyo is written" トウキョウ could indeed be misleading; but by contrast it could be helpful for those of our readers who have started to acquire Japanese but are stumbling around in it to say that when rendered in kana it is so written, as opposed to the plausible トーキョー or トオキョオ. As for IPA, this could be useful; I suppose that it's potentially misleading if some articles use close transcription and others use loose. -- Hoary (talk) 03:01, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Is Wikipedia now to be a place for novices to practise their Japanese? Why don't we make the articles bilingual on top of it, so we don't leave out the poor intermediate and advanced learners? CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 05:06, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
I don't know if Wikipedia is now to be a place for novices to practise their Japanese. The idea does strike me as rather odd, but as considerably less odd than that of an adult (or so I infer) objecting at length to the alleged superfluity of a tiny bit of katakana in an article while seemingly unconcerned about other, greater [as objectively measured in bytes] superfluities in the same article. -- Hoary (talk) 13:56, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
To be fair, I never joined in until Ryulong shamed me into it after I made a smart-assed comment about it in the thread about the new project image. Now that I've been dragged into the discussion, I have no intention of giving it up easily. Besides, I haven't read the articles to see their "superfluities". I'm not interested in J-Pop, but that's neither here no there. Is there a hierarchy of things we're allowed to talk about in articles? We're not allowed to talk about aspect Y of an article until aspects V, W and X are first made perfect? CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 21:18, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
It's not being suggested for "non-J-Pop articles" as Curly Turkey believes so Tokyo would not be touched. This is for articles that are Japanese in origin, but their name in Japan is not comprised of kanji, hiragana, or katakana but rather the English alphabet.—Ryulong (竜龙) 03:03, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
Curly Turkey believes no such thing. He was making a point using a contrasting article. He also normally prefers to speak in the first person, so please don't infer anything from this interlude. CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 05:04, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
How about something like 1Q84 or GA Japan? -- Hoary (talk) 03:30, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
What about 1Q84? Is that somehow unrpresentable with Hepburn? CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 05:08, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
I believe 1Q84 was an example of a non-music related Japanese article subject that utilizes the English alphabet (or rather the Arabic numerals) for its name. But I think we are just getting way off topic as to whether or not kana should be used to accompany such names to effectively show the opposite of romanization, namely how the already romanized name is parsed into Japanese, and whether or not including that backwardly implies to our readers that the kana form is the accepted form. Also I think you missed a signature somewhere above.—Ryulong (竜龙) 06:56, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
Well, katakana would perhaps be useful for such articles, particularly if the way it is read in Japanese does not match how one would read it in English. It is just my limited knowledge that prevents me from thinking of non-pop-culture subjects that this is an issue for.—Ryulong (竜龙) 03:46, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
Ryulong, that last sentence! Yes, you have a BSc in chemical oceanography, but the human brain can only take so much abuse. So here's some unencyclopedic advice: take a break from Japanese "pop culture", or anyway Japanese "pop culture" that's so anodyne as to be invited to appear on Kōhaku Uta Gassen. There's better music for the asking. There's better Japanese culture for the asking. (And of course oceans are fascinating too.) -- Hoary (talk) 13:56, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
Kohaku is full of shitty manufactured pop groups like the one that has become the focus of this thread. I think there's maybe 2 artists each year that I regularly listen to that get into that thing. Either way, I need to be stress free until I hear back from MEXT next month.—Ryulong (竜龙) 19:09, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Ryulong, you suggest that we're left with "a problem when the subject is Japanese but there is no Japanese script form of the subject's name, making it impossible to properly show the pronunciation". Tricky, sometimes, sure, but not impossible. Mostly, it seems, however, that the pronunciation is pretty obvious. "YUI" is pronounced just like that. "Cute" is pronounced as "cute" regardless of what bits they might be adding. "AKB48" is pronounced "A K B forty-eight". "B'z" is pronounced like the English word "bees". (Yes, "cute-o", "eight-o", "bees-u", but how many WP readers are there who can read katakana but couldn't have guessed that?) How often is it that a simple explanatory note won't do? Besides "Misia" are there even any tricky names? IPA is the standard pronunciation guide at Wikipedia. I can see how some might find it difficult to fathom but there is a key we can link to. But even "Misia" could be explained in words (the first "i" is long and the "sia" is pronounced as "sha"). The thing is that katakana is plainly and simply not a pronunciation guide for general readers of English. For the general en.Wikipedia readership katakana is some foreign script, the inclusion of which implies that this is how the name is usually written in that language. I'm sure you can find examples of the names' being written in katakana (as with the names of people) but obscure instances are of no relevance. JIMp talk·cont 17:17, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

IPA may be standard elsewhere on Wikipedia, but Hepburn is standard for Japanese articles. CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 21:20, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
It may be easy for us to see, but it's not inherently easy to determine that the band AAA's name is supposed to be called "Triple A", that "175R" is "Inago Rider", that MISIA is analagous to "Mischa/Misha", or that 1Q84 is "One Cue Eighty-Four" or "Ichi Kew Hachi Yon" or whatever it is. So if kana is not preferred for these situations, what do we do instead?—Ryulong (竜龙) 19:09, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
Hepburn, which will be required whether we use katakana or not, anyways. CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 21:08, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
It just seems to me that having English and Hepburn, without anything remotely Japanese, is missing something.—Ryulong (竜龙) 22:32, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
If the Japanese RS pre-dominantly give a name a certain way, that's the Japanese name. Wiki is not the Académie japonaise. We should not be telling the Japanese to be more Japanese, African-Americans to be more black, or the pope to be more Catholic. Kauffner (talk) 01:51, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
Where has that even been remotely suggested?—Ryulong (竜龙) 01:58, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Ryulong, "if kana is not preferred for these situations, what do we do instead?" We do what you've just done: write an explanation in English. JIMp talk·cont 02:29, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

So do we ignore intimating in any way the Japanese sometimes parse it?—Ryulong (竜龙) 02:53, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
We do that in Hepburn. And we don't make stuff up. CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 03:08, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
So for 1Q84 we just have "Ichi-Kyū-Hachi-Yon"?—Ryulong (竜龙) 03:12, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
If there are reliable sources that talk about the title being written "ichi-kew-hachi-yon", then that should be noted, with a citation. It's unusual enough that it's unlikely not to have been written about somewhere. But absolutely no need whatsoever for katakana. CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 03:20, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
That's not what I asked because "kew" is in no way the Hepburn romanization, and neither is "Triple A".—Ryulong (竜龙) 03:34, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
Umm...did you read what I actually wrote? I wrote that the "kew" spelling should be noted (with a citation) for being so unusual, not that it should be used as a pronunciation guide. CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 04:40, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
It seems I was mistaken. But does there really need to be a citation when a form is utilized by the subject itself?—Ryulong (竜龙) 07:59, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
Of course. Otherwise, what's to stop people from just simply quoting the entire book? You do understand why it's important to use secondary sources in an encyclopaedia, don't you? CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 20:54, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
If it refers to itself by a particular name, why is it necessary to cite that fact?—Ryulong (竜龙) 20:58, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
You're really enjoying this treadmill, aren't you?
  1. People and institutions don't refer to themselves by their pronunciaiton guides.
  2. If I were somehow notable, and I consistently referred to myself as "the world's greatest lover", but no secondary source bothered to pick up on that, would you state my amorous prowess as fact?
Please, please, please read up on why it's important to use secondary sources (there are exceptions. What you're talking about doesn't fall within that realm). CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 22:56, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
If you were "Curly Turkey" but you pronounced that as "The World's Greatest Lover" and others pronounced it that way at your insistence, then clearly we would have to make note of that, but I doubt that we'd need a citation for it. I do not see why we would need a reference separated from you to make note of that information.—Ryulong (竜龙) 00:09, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
Why would you doubt we'd need a citation? On the contrary, I would assume such an unanticipated claim would demand a citation. Citations are for verification. You understand that, don't you? CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 00:16, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
Actually, Wikipedia allows self-published sources. If a personal name "is not unduly self-serving" and "there's no reasonable doubt" that it is correct, a self-published source can be used. Moscowconnection (talk) 23:42, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
Are you suggesting the copy on the cover of a book (which may not have been written, or even approved of, by the author) counts as a self-published source? CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 03:31, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
That's not the point. Why would a source be necessary for a pronunciation?—Ryulong (竜龙) 00:29, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
If there is any chance it could be disputed, or if it is a non-standard transliteration. CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 03:34, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
I have a suggestion. Where in Japanese press/sources, the topic in question is sometimes represented in Kana (as apparently a few of the topics currently being discussed are, from what people are writing here) then the kana should be in the article. If the pronounciation is meant to be different from standard English pronouciation, then Hepburn, IPA and SAMPA should be indicated; SAMPA solves the problem of special fonts. 70.49.124.225 (talk) 06:25, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Summary of discussion

Should katakana be included in the opening of an article as a pronunciation guide?

Support

  1. ”Well, katakana would perhaps be useful for such articles, particularly if the way it is read in Japanese does not match how one would read it in English." —Ryulong (竜龙)
  2. “knowing the Japanese pronunciation via the kana is important.” ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 05:56, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. "For the general en.Wikipedia readership katakana is some foreign script, the inclusion of which implies that this is how the name is usually written in that language. JIMp talk·cont
  2. Kana will make readers, “assume that the singers have kana names in Japanese, which is not the case." --Kauffner (talk) 04:56, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
  3. "We do [pronunciation] in Hepburn. And we don't make stuff up. CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 03:08, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
  4. “Using katakana as a pronunciation guide on English Wikipedia strikes me as bizarre, and, as I have mentioned on the relevant article talk pages, misleadingly implies that the katakana forms are how the names are written in Japanese situations, which is not the case for either Yui or Misia” --DAJF (talk 09:59, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
  5. "I see nothing in WP:MOS-JA that indicates non-transliteration use of katakana should be included in the article simply because the individual is Japanese." TJRC (talk) 23:08, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
  6. "Most people don't have East Asian language support installed and see squares. It looks unprofessional. An article should start with a simple English-language sentence.” Moscowconnection (talk) 12:45, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
  7. "What if we added a katakana レイディ ガガ to Lady GaGa article? Why is it permitted to add kanas to Yui (singer), Misia or AKB48?” Phoenix7777 (talk) 09:22, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
  8. "Allow me to add myself to the voices against adding kana to these kinds of articles. For the pronunciation, we have Hepburn romanization (I wouldn't mind IPA as well, but I'm not sure if it's necessary)." Mr. Stradivarius 08:37, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Other comments

  1. If a topic (ie. Yui (singer) ) is a native Japanese topic, and some native Japanese sources use Kana, then WP:UEIA applies. 70.49.124.225 (talk) 11:46, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
  2. "As for the katakana, how is it not inferrable from the Hepburn form, which is anyway given? But I can't see anything wrong with providing it.” As for the katakana, how is it not inferrable from the Hepburn form, which is anyway given? But I can't see anything wrong with providing it. Hoary (talk) 08:16, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

The summary compiled by Kauffner (talk) 03:46, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

This wasn't a vote, Kauffner.—Ryulong (竜龙) 05:42, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
The discussion was exhasperatingly long and convoluted. I think Kauffner was attempting to give a summary for latecomers (and anyone else who finds the various threads hard to follow)---summary, as in "synopsis", rather than "final sum". CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 06:58, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
It'd be better if he hadn't used the numbered list notation.—Ryulong (竜龙) 08:10, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Missing Articles

Apparently there's a new tool to help identify notable articles missing from other wikipedias, which lists those on x project with lots of interwiki links but none to eg the en wikipedia: [3] I set it for articles on ja with at least 20 interwiki links and none to en; top hits: 歌手, 労働, 果物, ハッカー, 画家, アナキン・スカイウォーカー etc; looks like in some instances this is a maintenance issue (does a bot not do this, or are some of these more complex?); a search set at a level of 3 interwiki links gives some more specific hits, largely relating to manga apparently, but may be of interest to someone; next clean-up task for power-users Prburley and Boneyard90? Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 10:56, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

There are 20 interwiki links with no enwiki because words in different languages don't correspond one-to-one to each other. Moscowconnection (talk) 11:18, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
And there was me thinking 果物 meant fruit... Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 11:44, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
English Fruit is linked to ja:果実, which too means "fruit". Moscowconnection (talk) 12:13, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
And アナキン・スカイウォーカー ? Multiple referents too? Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 12:17, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
English Anakin Skywalker was merged into Darth Vader. Not words, but article' scopes don't correspont one-to-one to each other. The merge is outrageous. Moscowconnection (talk) 12:28, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
果物 is fruit as in the food stuff, while 果実 is the botanical term. 歌手 is singer, and we have no stand alone article on a person who sings. 労働 is "manual labor", and manual labour exists without many interwikis. Hacker (computer security) exists for ハッカー. And 画家 or "painter" is just simply something that doesn't need its own standalone page. It just seems that the Japanese Wikipedia makes individual articles on its native words, that we don't need separate coverage on the English Wikipedia.—Ryulong (竜龙) 17:35, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
"ja:労働" is "labour", and Englsh "Labour" is a disambiguation page that is interwikilinked to "ja:レイバー". The Japanese article about "ja:労働" ("labour") seems very sketchy anyway and simply disambiguates between different types of labour in the beginning, including "ja:肉体労働" ("physical labour"). But "ja:肉体労働" ("physical labour") is redirected to "ja:ブルーカラー" ("blue collar"). And so on. Moscowconnection (talk) 20:27, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

There are much more interesting articles on that site with no English page. For example, everyone in Japan knows ja:藤子・F・不二雄, but the poor English Wikipedia only has the joint name Fujiko Fujio. Most people in Japan know ja:魏志倭人伝 but there is no mention of it on English Wikipedia. I happen to be a researcher on the subject and would write an article myself, but based on the ridiculous arguments on this page it seems like I would have more to lose than to gain by doing so. Shii (tock) 02:01, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Don't let the ridiculous arguments on this page deter you from contributing useful information. Just because some people like to argue interminably about inane topics, often using circular arguments, doesn't mean everyone does. wink We would love to have you contribute within your expertise (or soon-to-be-expertise, anyway). ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 07:08, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
The Gishiwajinden currently redirects to the Chinese records, but it's covered in other languages already. It's well-known and an English article is definitely needed. I would like to see a more informative article of ja:ヤマト王権 as well. --Shinkansen Fan (talk) 13:14, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Natalie.mu

Please someone come to Talk:Cute (Japanese band)#Music videos and confirm that Natalie.mu is neither a blog nor a fan site. I've just created the article Natalie (website) but I'm not sure if it's convincing enough. Moscowconnection (talk) 01:49, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

The article doesn't convince. The discussion continues there. Is it possible to just add Natalie.mu to the list Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and manga/Online reliable sources? (I haven't been able to find other lists like that, are there any for music, etc.?) And, maybe create such a list for the whole WikiProject Japan to stop any problems with citing Japanese media once and for all? Then, we will be able to just silently show the list to opponents. Moscowconnection (talk) 17:35, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

It shouldn't be questioned in the first place.—Ryulong (竜龙) 19:24, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
I've seen people questioning the reliability of Oricon, so I think a list of reliable Japanese sources would be nice to have. It's too hard to argue with people every time. It would be nice just to show them a list approved by the community. Moscowconnection (talk) 19:31, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Where have they been saying the Oricon isn't a reliable source?—Ryulong (竜龙) 19:59, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Not "them". ^_^ As in Not on the Cute talk page. It's mentioned here: Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive 14#Japanese sources. Moscowconnection (talk) 20:11, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

RfC: Use of Simplified Chinese on Chinese characters (i.e. Kanji)

There is an ongoing RfC at Talk:Chinese characters#RfC: Simplified Chinese within the infobox image regarding whether or not Simplified Chinese should be removed from the infobox image on that article. It would be helpful if a third opinion can be provided to assist in forming consensus. If you would like to participate in the discussion, please feel free to do so. -- 李博杰  | Talk contribs email 10:02, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Please add info

Could someone please add this info to the Current sea level rise article? I am prohibited by ArbCom sanction from doing so, but this is important information, especially since it was a Japanese-led team of scientists who published the paper. Thank you. Cla68 (talk) 22:11, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Taisha/Jinja/Jingū etc

It's been brought to my attention that JMOS currently prescribes "Shrine" for the title; no Hōryū Temple though; is there any chance of revisiting this? (1) Less exact (2) Sounds really odd to my ears at least (3) Confusing as per eg Tamamushi Zushi or "Tamamushi Shrine"; what kind of evidence would need to be cited in support? Thanks, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 02:27, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Final vote on which image to use

Well, based on the voting above, these two tied as the most popular choices. Now we get to decide between them. Please voice your support under one of the following choices. The voting period will be at least two weeks, but may be extended if the discussion or participation warrants it. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 06:44, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Itsukushima torii angle.jpg

The current image being used.

If you would like to see this image used in the project banner, please voice your support here.


File:Red Fuji southern wind clear morning.jpg

A picture of Mount Fuji, already used in some project templates.

If you would like to see this image used in the project banner, please voice your support here.

Anyone else want to vote?

If no further votes are cast in the next few days, I will close this discussion and make the determination based on those votes. From the above, it seems keeping the existing image is the preferred option. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 05:59, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

I sent out a message to the half-dozen-or-so editors who voted in the poll but haven't joined in the final vote yet. I was afraid this would be buried by the bickering over how to represent J-Pop band names that's going on below. Hopefully we'll get a few more votes before this thing closes. CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 06:35, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 06:46, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
Uh, oh - this may be a game changer, look at the Japan-stub marker - fear this may require renewal of the debate: Japan stub.svg, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 09:49, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
Uh oh, you're right. Better get a couple of fish ready to slap some sense into all those careless bozos who don't understand the extent of ramifications the result of this vote could have. CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 04:30, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Tonkori (トンコリ): need help from Japanese speaker to add refs to this article about the Ainu harp

Tonkori.jpg

The tonkori is a type of long zither played by the Ainu people of northern Japan and the nearby Russian islands. Like a lot of Ainu culture, the instrument was nearly wiped out, but has experienced some small resurgence. The article had been unreferenced for over 5 years, so recently I went in and fleshed it out, with now nearly every point traceable back to a reference.

I would imagine there are some RSs available online in Japanese, which could be used to add further details, and/or confirm the few details yet unreferenced. Among the points I'd like to reference are the specific use of Jezo spruce (a tree common in Hokkaido) to make the instrument, and the custom of naming parts of the instrument after the female body. For the latter, the ja.wiki article has some detailed, and rather earthy, examples, but I don't want to include those unless I can properly cite them.

I'd greatly appreciate any help in expanding the article using Japanese sources, so if anyone here is interested in Ainu culture, or in ethnomusicology, and happens to speak Japanese, your help would be greatly appreciated. For my part, I'll look to get the article translated into Spanish and French (and I might be able to swing Catalan with gTranslate and some cleanup work, since ca.wiki is huge into ethnomusicology) in order to bring more attention to this lovely instrument, and survivor of near-extinction. MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:19, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Japanese online refs via Journal@rchive: [4] and CiNii: [5] Easy to find, less easy to understand..., Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 19:44, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
JSTOR's not giving me much: 8 articles with basically one word or line each: Traditional Music of the Ainu (Takashi Ogawa) Journal of the International Folk Music Council, Vol. 13, (1961), p. 75 says it's a rare instrument now only found in museums; Women, Musical Instruments and Instrumental Music (Lujza Tari) Studia Musicologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, T. 40, Fasc. 1/3 (1999), pp. 95-143 p116 says it's a women's instrument like the koto, referencing the Grove (I see you have the Malm); the Grove vol 12 p 383f says "Typical Ainu instruments are the tonkori, a five-string zither (fig.39), and the mukkuri, a jew's harp. Both terms are onomatopoeic derivations from the instruments sounds... The tonkori, used mostly by Ainu from Sakhalin, has a hollow soundboard about 120 cm long, 10 cm wide and 5 cm thick. The player sits with the instrument resting against his [sic.] shoulder or held in his arms while he plucks the strings with the fingers of both hands. The basic string tuning is in 4ths and 5ths [a-d'-g'-c'-f'], but there are some variants. A characteristic feature of the instrument is the star-like soundhole in its centre. When a ball is inserted into this hole, the instrument is thought to be given spiritual life. The tonkori was also formerly used as a ritualistic tool...Published research on Ainu music itself has remained sparse. Chiba Nobuhiko has begun to provide a flood of detailed analyses of tonkori music in particular..." Cites five articles by this author on tonkori/Ainu/Sakhalin/Karafuto if you want the citations; no mention of the Yezo Spruce (エゾマツ) or furry bits though. Of the Japanese articles above I reckon you might want to include this open source article, as it has nice drawings, a ?typology?, and a timeline, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 20:49, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the support! I'll work the Grove ref into there especially, as it's good to get the approximate measurements. For tuning, there are some facts I need to double-check, maybe with the Ainu Museum, and then I plan to get someone better at graphics to get a "tuning diagram" like those used in some other string instrument articles, showing the layout of notes on the instrument, and the pitches on the musical staff. The Ci.nii.ac.jp article has some cool images, but I can't read Japanese and thus can't tell if it's an RS or no. I'll apply what you've noted, and will keep plugging for more refs. MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:08, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
Does this help? Translation:[6], [7], and [8] The untranslated "ラレソドファ" is "A, D, G, C, F". I found the instrument on sale at here. The page says there is a walnut in the middle hole.Oda Mari (talk) 17:12, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Proposal at List of cities in Japan

I made a proposal to make cities more sortable at Talk:List of cities in Japan#Proposal: make the whole list sortable. Per WP:BOLD, I submitted this change first, but got reverted so now we have voting. --JBrown23 (talk) 13:50, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Requested move at Gojira

There is a move discussion taking place here, and the input of any and all interested editors would be greatly appreciated. Evanh2008 (talk|contribs) 09:30, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Re-org at Category:Ainu; any interest in forming Ainu Task Force?

This over-cat was a bit cluttered, so I've gone in and added some sub-cats to better line it out, and sub-cat'ed several articles which could be refined:

There's probably a way in Category:Ainu culture to make a subcat for their oral literature. I'm not sure whether I should just make Category:Ainu literature and include both oral and written, or if there's a better way to file their spoken sagas and epics. I also went to WP:WikiProject Food and issued a challenge to help fill out the Cuisine category, so will see how that goes.

Hope this is of interest to folks tracking on Ainu issues! MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:36, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Is there any interest in, or has there been discussion of, having an Ainu Task Force subordinate to this Project? Not to make it a big labour investment or anything, but it'd be quick work to add an "Ainu" tag to the WP:JAPAN tags on their Talk pages, and then we'd be able to have the chart of article ratings, maintain a to-do list, etc. Thoughts? MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:39, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
An Ainu TF would be good, though, would be it for WPJAPAN or WP:EastAsia? Karafuto is no longer part of Japan... 70.24.251.208 (talk) 04:39, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
It could be a joint task force. There are several joint task forces under WPJ and other projects. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 06:00, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
So joint WP:East Asia, WP:Japan, and WP:Russia? Maybe WP:Ethnic groups as well? It wouldn't need to start out as much, just a basic structure, some small "Requested list" and then I and anyone who wants to help can add the tag to the current Ainu articles. There aren't more than 100 or so of them, so even doing it manually wouldn't take more than an hour or two. MatthewVanitas (talk) 03:02, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
Sure, though I think it would be hosted by WPJ given the close ties between the cultures (even if only in people's minds). Feel free to create it at Wikipedia:WikProject Japan/Ainu task force. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 06:43, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

Cool, I created the basic TF page at Wikipedia:WikProject Japan/Ainu task force, using the standard template. But what do I need to do to get the "{WikiProject Japan|ainu=yes}" template to actually display as "This article is part of the Ainu Task Force"? And should we also choose some small icon to display in the Talk WP:JA template alongside the mention of the task-force? Similarly, should we use that icon for an "ainu-stub" template for the articlespaces? Any preferences on what the best symbol would be? Is their "unofficial flag" legit at all (or just a fringe opinion?), or would it be better to pick some small design taken from Ainu art? MatthewVanitas (talk) 13:58, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

How about adding that to WPEastAsia's banner as well? (I've posted a note WP:EASTASIA) 70.24.251.208 (talk) 03:48, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
I put in a request to add |ainu= to the WP:JA talk template (Template_talk:WikiProject_Japan#Adding_.22Ainu_Task_Force.22_to_template.3F), but I'm not clear on how to get |ainu=yes to actually display as something with a link to the Task Force page, and an icon (still thinking to use the unofficial Ainu flag if there are no objections). I've also proposed an ainu-stub at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Stub_sorting/Proposals/2012/May#Ainu_stubs, also including the unofficial flag. Thanks for any advice on getting the template to properly display/list the Ainu TF! MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:24, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
The Ainu Task Force is now up and running as a Talk page template. The ainu-stub is still pending.
WikiProject Japan / Ainu (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject icon This page is within the scope of the WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 10:42, April 17, 2014 (JST, Heisei 26) (Refresh)
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This page is supported by the Ainu task force.
 


MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:59, 29 May 2012 (UTC)


Emperor/Empress to King & Queen

An admin might want to give User:World historia a tap on the shoulder. This editor has been changing the titles of Japanese emperor/empress articles without discussion. I'm having a little trouble with Queen Jingū, because it's been moved twice. Boneyard90 (talk) 02:46, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Page moves were undone and the editor is currently blocked for disruptive editing. --Kusunose 07:20, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

"Shinshūkyō", or "Shinkō shūkyō"?

The article on new Japanese religions has the former title, but why not the latter (a far more commonly used term)?

I raise the question here on its talk page. -- Hoary (talk) 13:18, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

I've now proposed a move more formally. You're free to "!vote" (i.e. to vote) at the same place, or rather the section immediately under it. -- Hoary (talk) 12:41, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Ai-chan

I've noticed a page named Ai-chan. It seems to be that this should be a disambiguation page to all characters named "Ai" from Japanese entertainment properties. What do you think? 70.24.251.208 (talk) 04:14, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

No.—Ryulong (竜龙) 04:50, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
Then it should redirect to the disambiguation page for Ai ? 70.24.251.208 (talk) 06:21, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
No it shouldn't. Ai-chan exists as a stand alone article on its own and nothing needs to be done about it.—Ryulong (竜龙) 07:33, 31 May 2012 (UTC)